If you are new to the forums, you must register a free account before you can post. The forums have a separate registration from the rest of www.chronofhorse.com, so your log in information for one will not automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

if you are talking about changing across the diagonal there should be no "bend" because it is a straight line.... you would of straightened the horse as you come onto the diagonal then as you approach the opposite side prepare for the new bend....

That's what I wanted to say too. Unless ETR was thinking about changing the bend via two half circles (C-X and X-A or E-X and X-B or whatever)?

so until this rule change being on wrong diagonal did not matter at all?

Well, IMO, it did/does matter to the horse's balance. I may be considered naive, but I believe that rules reflect principles of correct riding rather than the other way around.

Therefore, judges are well within their scope to comment on an "incorrect" diagonal if they believe it affects the movement. There aren't any rules that specifically address (in the exact words) "restricting with outside rein," either. I have seen remarks about both diagonal and rein restriction as judge's observations in movement blocks.

I haven't written collectives in a couple of years and haven't had time to read them before handing them to the runner, so I can't say if diagonal comes up there, but if the judge believes "incorrect diagonal" affects the horse's performance then it seems appropriate to evaluate as part of "effects of rider's aids".

OK, thanks for clarifying. I suppose I learned diagonals as "when to rise" rather than "when to sit". But this business of sitting "when the outside fore and inside near hooves are on the ground" still seems weird, as isn't one at the top of the rise when most horses have that moment of suspension when NO hooves are on the ground?

I agree with how it affects a horse's balance, though. Mine is definitely happier when I get it right. (and this, possibly because I'm not symmetric and neither are most horses, is an ongoing challenge.)

Oh...my...word. With all the terrible riding we see at the lower levels, this is what we now need to obsess over? Honestly, if the judge is only worried about a posting diagonal and not the rest of a rider's balance, etc. they should not be judging! Besides, as MBM pointed out, experienced riders will use different diagonals at different times to achieve different goals with a horse. This militaristic obsession so many trainers have these days with ONE correct ( which is wrong) diagonal is absurd.

Only in a military parade is it necessary for this level of censure. Not in the dressage ring. Thus the reason it is not a requirement in the rule information. (The OP ought to correct their subject title.)

I was taught that there can be occasions on which posting on the opposite diagonal can benefit the horse. I suppose if you want to exert influence over the outside hind more than the inside, this could be the case. How can a judge know if you're making a deliberate choice of diagonal or if you're being careless? They can't read your mind. I suppose they can observe what they believe to be the effect of your choice of posting diagonal on the horse's way of going.

I'm still curious about leg yield. I would assume that you post according to the positioning of the horse. If the horse is positioned right, you would sit when the left fore is forward. Let's say you're tracking left, turn down the centerline, and leg yield left (horse positioned right). Would you change your posting diagonal when you set up the leg yield? Is that correct?

I had a judge call me off course years ago at a recognized show for posting on the "wrong" diagonal and deduct 2 points. I protested the result and the judge changed the score. With the rule change, it's certainly worth discussing the impact on scoring. I do think some judges might take a deduction and wait to see if you challenge it.

That judges was absolutely INcorrect, but I am not sure if this rule solves that (lowering the score with -2 as an error). It's too loosely written, and imho silly. And it gives no latitude for schooling. And a horse IS positioned on a straight line, so when/where flexion and bend changes should be when the diagonal changes, ideally at the of a diagonal. However, there may be reasoning to do it at the beginning or even middle. However in the middle usually disturbs the flow (and should never be done there during a lengthening).

Cant find this in the fei guidelines as a change yet (which is what our national body usually follows).

And things like the LY do bring up questions, since the horse is flexed to the new direction before it is begun, so the diagonal would change there.

And then we have to discuss broken lines (diagonal point to x to diagonal point). Two changes of diagonal needed? Keep the same one? I see the train coming down the tracks on this one, UNNECESSARILY.

Had a judge mark down my horse with 'head should be higher' or 'head should be lower' at Training Level. That does not show up anywhere in the directives. Said something specific was good on one movement and the next time 2 points off for same exact thing in other direction. This was a new judge, but this new judge rides at FEI levels and should know better. This was a qualifying class for the GAIG and the comments, for the most part, had NOTHING to do with the directives. The very few comments that were related to the directives were OK. The others were completely out of place. What is the best way to handle this - except to never ride before that judge again?

Tranquility Farm - Proud breeder of Born in the USA Sport Horses, and Cob-sized Warmbloods
Now apparently completely invisible!

so are judges only supposed to use words/ideas that are listed on the directives? seems a bit non robust if so.

My understanding is that this is the direction judge instruction is going, yes. It's not hard-and-fast, but certainly does increase the likelihood of consistent judging

Judging is so different from riding ... I know we pay a lot of money to show, and ostensibly the point is to get a fair evaluation from a knowledgeable person, but saying that because someone rides FEI means he or she should be an excellent judge (not just see, but also comment on AND score within a brief moment) right off the bat is expecting a lot.

What is the best way to handle this - except to never ride before that judge again?

Complete a judge/show evaluation form that you obtain from the show office and send it in. The USEF pays attention to these things and forwards comments on to judges (both compliments and criticisms).

Additionally, let the show management know you were unhappy (or happy).

One final note about comments ... it's not always the judge's fault. They, like the riders, are at the mercy of scribes' ability to accurately capture the judge's intention quickly and legibly. "More" is just four letters but to leave it off (or think "I'll go back and put it in later") changes everything about a comment.

Complete a judge/show evaluation form that you obtain from the show office and send it in. The USEF pays attention to these things and forwards comments on to judges (both compliments and criticisms).

Additionally, let the show management know you were unhappy (or happy).

One final note about comments ... it's not always the judge's fault. They, like the riders, are at the mercy of scribes' ability to accurately capture the judge's intention quickly and legibly. "More" is just four letters but to leave it off (or think "I'll go back and put it in later") changes everything about a comment.

Scribes should never try to "capture the judge's intention" - they should write WHAT S/HE SAID, nothing more or less. And yes, I have scribed quite a bit.

Regarding judges marking errors for diagonals, E-trak just posted that judges cannot call an error, but they can mark you down in the movement.

Scribes should never try to "capture the judge's intention" - they should write WHAT S/HE SAID, nothing more or less. And yes, I have scribed quite a bit.

Well, of course not! In a perfect world, every scribe would get every word exactly as the judge speaks it (and know the tests well enough to understand when a comment doesn't match the movement and clarify quickly with a "transitions?" when the comment is clearly for the movement that follows or "was that xyz?" when it appears the judge gave a score for transitions that are in the same box as the gait.

However, there are times when scribes do their best to get as many words as possible but are not able to capture them all. Not sayin' it's right, just trying to word the reality as gently as possible.

Scribes should also never distract judges with random questions, but as an experienced scribe yourself, how many times have people commented "oh I love doing that, you get to pick the judge's brain"?

Regarding judges marking errors for diagonals, E-trak just posted that judges cannot call an error, but they can mark you down in the movement.

While I understand you were probably combining responses to two posts for expediency, just in case you thought anything I wrote (that you quoted) was about errors, I'd like to clarify that it was not. All of my observations were regarding "comments".

E-Trak looks like an interesting resource, thanks for the reference, lorilu

Oh man,the comment on never writing anything less than the judge says reminds me of a recent scribing experience. I was filling in for someone and hadn't been writing as much freehand in recent years. This guy was one of the most repetitive guys (didn't matter who was riding he repeated his pet peeve on every movement) and wordy people I've had the misfortune of scribing for. To keep up with him, I tried doing short hand. That wasn't working well enough. I finally had to just not repeat the same LONG statement over and over again and instead write it on longer movements and just capture the other comments.

This guy needed to go back to judge training! He was attempting to write a novella where every chapter was pretty much the same--and filled with run on sentences.

If we were able to type the comments, I could have just done a cut and paste.

hahhaa ... yep, I've wanted to create a rubber stamp for some judges who have their go-to phrases, or write it once at the bottom of the test with a "see note" in boxes.

As far as cutting and pasting, I cannot remember his name, but the TD at a recent show told me about a show manager who is completely paperless (I cannot remember the name for nuffin).

He's written the software for the whole shebang and it completes the calculations, so there's no scorer. The sheet (so I was told) is printed in (or near?) the judge's booth, signed and the runner brings a completely scored test back to the office. (There is a stack of tests just in case something happens with the software, and the judge involved in the discussion who had experienced the system said it was wonderful.

Per leg yield: the horse is kept relatively straight, but there is still an inside/outside. If you are leg yielding toward right, the left is inside, and right side is outside; if you are leg yielding left, the right side is inside, and the left side is outside.